- that logo hurts my eyes- blue tracker needs a margin between itself and the rankings- the red on the bar graph is very ... red- realign your ads at the bottom of the page- the entire site seems offset to the left- 'back to top' button is in a very random spot. I recommend it here:

- don't leave the mention of wowprogress there too long since you're very clearly trying to pull their traffic, not give it to them- the numbered lists at the bottom of the help tab need to be aligned- search button crops letters:

- I recommend making the search bar mousover mimic a hyperlink. Static bores people (me?)- I like your blue tracker

wowraider wrote:[*] Rankings for 10 and 25 men formats calculated separately, there is no united ladder, because there is no sense in it.

I agree with this ; fights between the two raid sizes often have vastly different difficulties and directly comparing the two formats isn't very useful.

So, why is it that the first page in the PvE progress section appears to be a united ladder ?

Whoops, forgot to update initial post. You see, because score system has no human factor involved and calculated by same universal algorithm, it's perfectly shows guild progression efforts. So it's not a problem to compare 10 vs 25 men scores.

Simply put, not matter what any users say, 10 man and 25 man are 2 different fights. The values of damage are different, hp values are different, mechanics are changed and different. No one under values their difficulty or puts that in question but, just because the boss has the same name, does not make it the same boss. It's like saying playing tennis on clay is just like playing on grass because it's tennis.

Zoomkin wrote:Simply put, not matter what any users say, 10 man and 25 man are 2 different fights. The values of damage are different, hp values are different, mechanics are changed and different. No one under values their difficulty or puts that in question but, just because the boss has the same name, does not make it the same boss. It's like saying playing tennis on clay is just like playing on grass because it's tennis.

This.

10 man is balanced completely differently than 25 man, in large part because Blizzard has access to an internal 10 man testing team, and not a 25 man one, so values are simply scaled up for the larger format in ways that might not make much sense once the mechanics of the fight come in to play. Additionally, as Dan is saying, mechanics might be changed or omitted in 10 man simply as a product of the raid size difference. This is necessary because, when it's not done (as was the case in heroic Amber-Shaper 10 man pre-hotfix) the boss is simply unkillable in the smaller format.

The bottom line is that no one is trying to claim superiority or greater difficulty of one format over the other. The two formats are simply different, and therefore not comparable. Raid size ladders should be separate for the same reason that arena ladders are : you cannot have a valid and useful ranking system if the players or teams that you are ranking are not competing in the same event.

grunz wrote:Geez Dan, you use tennis as an example and whiff on the obvious analogy of singles vs doubles

I was going for the just because it has the same name thing, same 2 people could play against each other and have to play completely different. But, yea doubles vs singles works ITS JUST NOT THE SAME ANALOGY JB.

Please, understand that there is a difference between comparing fights and comparing score. For example, there are two students: math student and history student. They visiting different lectures and have pretty different exams. But, you still can say that student A is better than student B, comparing their grades. Those grades came from different sources and for different things, but they demonstrates student's diligence.Here is the same. There are two different set of grades in each format. But you still can compare them, cause they all calculated by the same algorithm.

Comparing 10 and 25 results is not doable. You cannot and will not come up with any algorithm or rule set that will change that.

They are as different as football and baseball. Just because they are both sports, doesnt mean you can compare the two. It's two different leagues and two different difficulties (not saying one is harder than the other). The logistics, planning, tuning, gearing, execution, mindset, positioning, class stacking, balance, the overall difficulty along with many other variables are all different and can not be compared.

You need two separate ranking systems. That's it. The more people try, the most its just making the situation worse.

Comparing 10 and 25 results is not doable. You cannot and will not come up with any algorithm or rule set that will change that.

They are as different as football and baseball. Just because they are both sports, doesnt mean you can compare the two. It's two different leagues and two different difficulties (not saying one is harder than the other). The logistics, planning, tuning, gearing, execution, mindset, positioning, class stacking, balance, the overall difficulty along with many other variables are all different and can not be compared.

You need two separate ranking systems. That's it. The more people try, the most its just making the situation worse.

Two different formats requires two different leaderboards.

My damn English... need to get some education.

There are 3 leaderboards. 25 men, 10 men, and total. Total is based on score. Not any bosses comparisions. And you are free to ignore total ladder.

I think myself, that only format-specific boards are accurate. But, anyway, it's possible to compare the score. Student's example is pretty good illustration i think. You can compare total sum of GPA of pretty different students. But can't compare what that GPA came for.